I have been working at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 5 years)

Pros

Staff come from diverse cultural backgrounds - so interesting people and interesting workPlenty of opportunities to travelWorthwhile mission

Cons

Staff come from diverse cultural backgrounds - so plenty of opportunities for discrimination and nepotismFrequent travel is exhausting and poorly compensatedWorthwhile mission in principle - but has strayed a long way from itStandard of work is surprisingly lowSenior management team is extraordinarily poor - no leadership, just posturing, no communication, only noise

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Stop posting fake reviews on Glassdoor that say the place is wonderful - noone believes them. Instead fix the problems. Can't you see the ship is sinking around you?

I have been working at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 3 years)

Pros

Mission, benefits are decent and the in-country field staff are great

Cons

Where do I begin. CEO: very out of touch with the real issues at MSH, going on a (paid) sabbatical during the current worst time of the organization's state and we haven't won any real large projects, preaches the mission and vision of MSH when he doesn't adhere to them himself, his approach and work-style of commands is top-down, his EA of 10 years suddenly left or was she pushed out because she knew too much either way doesn't look good for him. He's now supposedly writing a book during his sabbatical yet it's for MSH? Hmmmm. COO: seems to be trying yet it's evident that he's not supposed by the CEO as one person can't simply be handling all the mega issues, with him if he like you're golden if not you're blackballed, he's impossible to even get a meeting because his EA is unapproachable and has an attitude, Leadership Team: dysfunctional, beat to their own drum and they seem to really not like each other, there's leaks of confidential information. CFO: seems OK but she plays favorites her unit is very under staffed and they only hire temps. Communications between supervisors, directors, senior leaders to their direct reports are poor in general, I've witnessed over and over again humiliation yet people are afraid to approach HR in fear of the consequences. I'll admit, so am I.

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Unless there's a real movement to really to change the organization for the better, it will only continue to sink. I highly suggest turning to the working staff in the field that are doing all the real work and trying to make impact on health, they should be tapped into more for leadership and resources not the highly-paid non-performers at the HQ. The founders of MSH, (if they don't already know) would be devastated if they all knew.

I worked at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 3 years)

Pros

Amazing field staffSolid staff in pharma unitSome new hires have been good

Cons

Hired 2 VPs for development jobs who didn't meet the minimum job qualificationsMost of the Global Technical Leads need to leave because they are not up on what's happening in their fieldToo many junior staff flying to developing countries as experts when they don't have the skills, it's insulting to the field

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Stop overpaying for minimum output, you are losing the good peopleIf a hire doesn't work, just let it goStop undermining one anotherHold senior staff accountable for their work output

4 weeks of vacation, generally better work life balance than the for-profit world (although this varies based on function), younger staff are nice and approachable.

Cons

Leadership is ineffective and nonexistent. They've been trying to find a new VP of business development for months and nobody seems to want the job, which is no wonder considering the poor quality of proposals lately and the declining reputation of MSH. The CEO and COO are totally ineffective. They both seem clueless and don't seem to understand their jobs. Also, the CEO recently announced that he's taking a 5 month "sabbatical" away from the company. Excuse me? Sabbatical? You mean paid vacation? The fact that a CEO needs a "sabbatical" should cause one to question whether or not he should be the CEO.

Internally, this place is a mess. There are quite a lot of very senior, highly paid people who don't do very much but are kept around because they're friendly with someone important. At the same time, opportunities for junior staff are very limited, and staff are not encouraged to advance themselves. People often get trapped here, railroaded into a specific function. The organization is not structured efficiently, and although there have been steps taken to fix this, it is still a major problem and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

There is very little direction, and it is very apparent that the senior leadership have no idea what they're doing. They have failed to run a viable business, and have turned a once-thriving and vibrant culture into a workplace with low morale and poor performance.

My supervisor does not communicate well with me and my colleagues, which creates an unnecessarily difficult and stressful work environment. I feel very isolated, and have no expectation that anyone would support me if I had an issue. My supervisor is not an advocate for me - this is a theme in keeping with the pervasive trend at MSH.

Advice to ManagementAdvice

If you aren't able to nurture a positive culture while leading with clear direction and purpose, step aside and let someone else try. Personally, I think you are all in way over your head, but unfortunately the board is too removed from the company to understand this.

There are some good building blocks here if senior management was able to take advantage of them. There are plenty of people who want to make this place better, and have good ideas on how to do that, but they are never heard from.

I worked at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 5 years)

Pros

- Interesting, challenging work- Truly global - people in the field and those who cycle through headquarters- Good work goes on "in the field"

Cons

In my career, I have not encountered a nastier, more miserable group of people. Founded with a noble mission, they have strayed far from their roots. Headquarters-led efforts to drive increased performance, compete in a competitive world, and build efficient systems and processes have largely been failures, and in the process they have lost their humanity.- Political, nasty, backstabbing work culture- Headquarters ivory tower, isolated and insensitive to good work that goes on in the field- Availability expected during evenings, weekends, vacations- Individual rewards based on favoritism rather than performance- Lack of career advancement opportunities for middle-level or senior-level professionals- Weak, competitive, and unaligned senior team- They have burned out and pushed out many high-quality professionals. However, everyone I know is happier after they've left.

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Change only comes from the top - the very top. Nothing will change until the CEO or COO goes.

I have been working at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 3 years)

Pros

Interesting work; opportunities for telecommuting - some of the time

Cons

For an organisation that promotes the so-called 'tao of leadership' this one doesn't have any. Senior management is completely AWOL. High ups from head office in Boston rarely darken the doors of the Arlington office and if they do they never leave their offices. The CEO has just announced a new policy of sabbaticals for the 'senior leadership team' and his way of leading is to be the first to take four months off - at a really critical time for the organisation's future - which doesn't say much for the judgement of either him or the board. Morale is appalling; HR is inept and obstructionist (and behaves like a core function instead of a support dept); the quality of the product is declining. Sad to see what was once a good organisation reduced to such a state by the ineptitude of an ego-driven management team who really have no idea of what goes on in the trenches.

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Find a CEO with vision and commitment, and the wherewithal to really lead. Get poor performers out of senior positions and put in people who can get the job done. Stop treating the staff as if they are stupid and cant see beyond the ends of their noses. The organisation could be terrific, but at this rate is going to go out backwards .

I have been working at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 3 years)

Pros

Good vacation time (if you can take it) and good 401K contributions.

Cons

The name, "Management Sciences..." is a joke. Management is clueless - many don't know how to manage staff or are put in charge of departments they know nothing about and yet feel entitled to dismiss input from staff with proven experience. Leadership knows (has stated!) certain departments and staff are mistreated and clearly doesn't care as nothing is done. Rewards mediocrity, penalizes hard workers that try to make a difference. Long-term "technical staff" are frequently unprofessional at best, rude and abuse at worst (yelling, harrassing, slamming doors) - both to new and/or younger colleagues as well as external stakeholders. High turnover as a result, including those leaving for lower salaries just to get away. Organizational ego is incredible. A lot of thinking that external criticism is flawed rather than assessing and revising strategies to improve performance. As a result, donors have closed several projects early or shifted the funding from MSH to another organization, yet MSH maintains its "we're the best, there's nothing wrong with us" mentality.

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Let go of the ego. Start treating staff fairly and thinking about the future, instead of favoring "old friends" and clinging to the past.

I have been working at Management Sciences for Health full-time (more than 8 years)

Pros

MSH is a good place to work early in your career. There is a lot of opportunity to learn and to grow. There are a lot of experienced and knowledgeable staff from whom to learn. The best thing about compensation is the company contribution and match to the 401(k).

Cons

The review from September 25th is a joke. The C-Suite (CEO, COO) probably wrote it themselves or instructed the new communications/change management person to write it and post it. The "few bad apples" are people who genuinely care about the mission but are frustrated by MSH's leader and his inability to articulate answers to any of a number of critical questions, such as why the two dozen organizational changes in the process of rolling out right now and distracting staff are beneficial to the organization at a time when MSH is not winning new work; why the measurement that MSH applies to its client work in terms of impact and benefit is not applied to the changes being considered internally, or why MSH spent over $600k on one management consulting firm last year and will probably spend even more this year. You can see this on MSH's most recent IRS 990.

Advice to ManagementAdvice

Stop trying to find the "few bad apples" and consider that the issues are real and need to be addressed.

Glassdoor has 15 Management Sciences for Health reviews submitted anonymously by Management Sciences for Health employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Management Sciences for Health is right for you.